Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

I wasn't/didnt vote for HC either - sm

Posted By: Kiki on 2008-08-29
In Reply to: I wouldn't either. I wasn't going to vote for HC. - Go McCain and Palin

and didn't mean to imply that that was why you were backing McCain, but there are a lot of people on both sides that will vote his way now that he has a woman on the ticket and there are people that will vote Obama because he is African American.  I think it is ridiculous just to vote for someone for those reasons, regardless of any thing about them, but a lot of people will.  Either way, this will be a historic election - We'll either have an African American Pres. or a woman VP. 


I don't know enough about her yet and it is too bad she is with McCain, because I really don't like him.  I did read somewhere just a minute ago that a while ago she said she had no idea what the VP does (many of us don't), so if Rep. win hopefully she will make some changes to what Cheney has done, or what he hasn't done.


At least now maybe I won't have to hear the #1 Republican anti-Obama slogan of he doesn't have enough experience, but Palin doesn't either. 


Let the games begin!




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Well, I sure didnt vote for the guy. We will NEVER
nm
I wouldn't either. I wasn't going to vote for HC.
This is a woman I can be proud of and who I can identify with.
McCain wasn't desperate and wasn't behind in the polls
In fact, they have been neck and and neck, and McCain has been gaining in the polls while Obama has been slipping. McCain could have taken the easy way and kept the stable course and picked safer, sure. Instead, he picked a maverick leader like himself, who isn't afraid to get in there and make changes even if it goes against their own party. I believe he wanted to say that the Republicans are the party for change, and wanted to make a bold statement. I've seen statements at "other sites" as well where people are absolutely joyous at this pick.
I didnt say she said that
I asked her if that was what she was saying.  She said, I hate to instill "fear" in anyone. If you don't sin, you won't have to repent.  I was simply asking her if she did not sin.  I was then stating that if she did not, she was perfect. 
i didnt think so
so from uterus to another, OH WELL!
Didnt post it here
I did not post anything vulgar.  I posted a link to a news website which has a news article about Bush and how he deals with his distractors.  It is up to the reader to decide whether to go to a news site and read the article.  I purposely did not post the article here because I dont break rules.
Here is the post..sorry it didnt come through

Calling me a Nazi??  Brunson you have no idea what me or my ancestors have gone through..This is over the line..This is WAY TOO MUCH..


 


Posted by **Brunson**  At least on these boards the two-initialed Nazi is allowed get away with her genocide of anything conservative, but that's not helping the post count on the board at all.


you didnt mind..

jumping in on my post about voting for Obama though did you?  I am not really nasty.  At all.  Also, I am not the top anything at my church.  I will pray for you, because you do need it even though you think that you dont.  I came in your conversation because I felt that I should.  True Christians today need to stand up for our belief in Jesus and not worry about what others may think of it.  The truth needs to be out because there will be a time when everyone will have to answer for their beliefs.  I am not going to stand before God at judgment and have him ask me why I didnt speak up for his son at the times that I could have.  My post is not nasty, it just goes against what most people want to believe.  People dont want to hear that they are not living right or that they will not go to heaven just because they are "good."  That is not the popular thing to say these days.  But every Christian who allows people they come into contact with believe that without telling them Jesus's message, they will be held accountable and I will not be one of them I hope and pray. 


Here is me praying for you!


wow I didnt know all that. AMEN
s
didnt mean to offend
No not because of his middle name,but he himself said he is a Muslim on TV. Anyways, I dont have anything against him or he being a Muslim, I just said he is one as someone posted he isnt.
didnt take much thinkin'

to craft a response to your post.  I chuckle at the thought that I am yoked with the responsibility of not making all liberals look bad.  This is a teeny, tiny message board tucked away in the vast armpit of the internetS, and I would never begin to take myself so seriously as to suppose I am representing anyone's opinions other than my own.  Don't take yourself so seriously. At best, 10-20 people visit here regularly and diligently apply any tactic at their disposal to suppress opinions other than their own.


 


 


 


what, didnt your mother believe in abortion?
I for one will be sending red envelopes to O! 
The dems obviously didnt have ENOUGH control, or else
n
I agree neither choice is great, but will vote McCain just as a vote against Obama. nm
x
didnt try to make this post political
Cronyism is wrong, both repblican and democrat..I re-read my post and no where did I make it political.  No matter if you are democrat or republican, cronyism is wrong..A person, especially being considered for a life time position, has to be judged on their merits, not on whom they know.
No, I didnt misstype....attempt at irony. lol. nm
nm
Then why didnt O just provide the REAL documents
nm
didnt hear the comment, missed it all
Can someone tell me what comment you are talking about?  I need to catch up!
the black lady didnt call anyone a name!
what are u talking about?  and what does Harlem dumbells mean?  Is this person referring to a dumb black person?  That is how it is sounding to me.  If that is not what the comment means, why doesnt the poster clarify this?
Hey you made a rhyme. Ur a poet and didnt know it
talented to say the least.
She didnt file the suit, just posting it.
nm
A vote for Ron Paul is a wasted vote. No chance on Earth he can win. sm
Votes for him only take away from the real candidates.
didnt say bush appointed him. said paulson did. besides that post wasnt for you n e way.
s
Good point. I don't vote party, I vote for the
person.  Every Democrat is not bad and every Republican good or vice versa.
Then you need to vote for Obama. A vote for McCain will...sm
not help you. Obama wants to give tax relief to 90% of Americans who earn 1% of the gross earnings in this country. The top 1% of earners bring in 90% of earnings. Any one person who earns $250,000 or less will benefit from Obama's tax plan.
they didn't vote - they registered to vote -
that is a big difference. The votes were not counted, they were stopped by the means in which they were supposed to be stopped - ID verification, address verification, etc. The cards were filled out by the ACORN workers and then given to the proper authorities to sort through.

The phony registrations were pulled out by the actual authorities. ACORN is just a middle man.
We get what we vote for. If we vote "party", we get extremes.
If we make it a point to try to identify candidates who hold moderate views and vote for them, rather than voting a "party ticket", we'll have a better chance of getting away from these extremes, whether right or left.

One of the problems, though, is that candidates often play games with their real positions. During the primaries, they talk the "party" line and then they move to the center for the general election. Both sides do this, unfortunately.

The only hope is to look at their past records - and take them seriously. History is prologue to the future. When a man has done certain things in his adult life, it tells us more about him than anything he says. If Obama hasn't taught us this fundamental truth, we'll never learn it. The evidence about him goes all the way back to his days in law school, and it was available for anyone to see. Some didn't bother to look. Others looked and didn't take it seriously. Either way, we weren't paying attention or he'd have probably never made it through the primaries.

No one can pull the wool over your eyes unless you let them, and the way they do it is by making smooth speeches filled with unlikely promises (and even glaring contradictions as they appeal to groups with opposite interests). They believe we won't notice the lies, exaggerations and mischaracterizations of their opponent's positions, etc. Unfortunately, they are often right.

Let's start taking the candidates' prior records and their life histories as the best evidence of who they really are - not their speeches. If we do this, we'll make better choices.
Obviously u didnt read, I said NONE of them are moral. Read the post before spouting off.

I know about this, it wasn't what I was asking for. SM
I was asking for a credible story that showed Laura Bush was drunk when the accident occurred, as gt stated above.  I am aware of this story. 
No, actually I wasn't. nm

That's wasn't me.
x
It wasn't a lie. sm

Saddam's son-in-law, who defected, said that the WMD were moved to Syria.  Several of Saddam's officers said the same.  This is an article I saved from some time ago.  Some interesting information. I do not doubt for a moment that there were WMD. He used them on his own people.  I am not sure how anyone can deny that he had them knowing that he killed thousands of Kurds with biological weapons.  


Iraqi WMD Mystery Solved
By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 2, 2006



Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Ryan Mauro, who spoke at the recent 2006 International Intelligence Summit on Iraq. He is the 19-year old author of  Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq and founder of WorldThreats.com. He was originally hired at age 16 as a geopolitical analyst for Tactical Defense Concepts. He is also a volunteer analyst and researcher for the Northeast Intelligence Network and the Reform Party of Syria and believed to be the youngest hired geopolitical analyst in the country.


Preview



Glazov: Mr. Mauro, nice to have you here again.


 


Mauro: Thank you. It's always great working with you.


 


Glazov: The recent Intelligence Summit released 12 hours of audiotapes of Saddam Hussein and his key officials discussing their WMD programs from the mid-1990s onwards. What do you make of the significance of these tapes? How do they square with your claim in your book that Russia helped move Iraqi WMD into Syria?


 


Mauro: The tapes are extremely significant in that they prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that as of the year 2000, Saddam Hussein had a secret plasma program to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, or special bombs as he calls them. The Duelfer Report previously concluded that this type of enrichment program ended in the 1980s, but here we have Saddam and his top advisors discussing using a power plant in the area of Basra for the program.  The scientists involved in the program are not known to the UN, leaving Western intelligence clueless.


 


On the tapes, you hear Saddam discussing the assistance of Russia and Brazil in dealing with the United Nations. He laughs off inspections, as his son-in-law who later defects, Hussein Kamil, reports how as late as 1995 their chemical and biological programs were being hidden from the world. They also discuss keeping the ingredients for these weapons separate, so that should they be found, they will be looked at as innocent dual-use items. They were not destroyed in 1991 as the Duelfer Report concludes. There are even indications on the tapes that Iraq may have had a role in the 2001 anthrax attacks.


 


My book was the first to make the claim that Russia was involved in moving Iraq's WMDs to Syria. After all the nay saying and criticizing I received for it, testimony at the Summit confirmed that this was true.


 


Glazov: What exactly is the evidence that Iraq moved its WMD into Syria?


 


Mauro: It has been confirmed across the board that 18-wheelers were seen going into Syria before the war, crossing the border soon after Iraqi intelligence replaced the border guards and cleared nearby areas for their passage. There are also eyewitness reports of the trucks going into Syria, and eyewitness reports of their burial in Lebanon.


 


The trucks with the weapons were tracked to three locations in Syria and Lebanon's Bekaa Valley, currently controlled by the Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah. Sources I've spoken with that have seen satellite photos of the movements confirm that the WMD in Syria are at military bases, while the ones in Lebanon are buried. A fourth site in Syria, the al-Safir WMD and missile site, should also be looked at. From spring to summer 2002, there was a lot of construction here involving the expansion of underground complexes.


 


We have tremendous testimony as well, by General Georges Sada, the former second-in-command of Saddam's Air Force that 56 flights took place on converted Iraqi Airways planes in the summer of 2002 to transport weapons, along with a ground shipment. He claims to know the pilots involved. A second Iraqi general, Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, in an interview I published, confirmed in detail the movement of WMD into Syria saying that discussion on such a move went back to the 1980s. He claims his sources for this include Iraqi scientists and others in the regime that were very close to him even after he defected. He confirmed to me that Russian vehicles, including ones equipped to handle hazardous materials, were used. Reports of WMD being moved out of Iraq to Syria go back to 1997, and it is believed by many that weapons were moved in and out of Iraq using Syria routinely since the mid-1990s.


 


The Italian media also reported that their intelligence services had information indicating that in January and February of 2003, Iraqi CDs full of formulas and research work along with tubes of anthrax and botulinum toxin were sent off to Syria. By the end of February, Iraqi WMD expertise was already in Syria including a top nuclear physicist.


 


An Iraqi scientist also led Coalition forces to hidden stockpiles of precursor chemicals that could be used to make chemical and biological weapons. The scientist said some facilities and weapons were destroyed, and the rest were sent to Syria. Syrian defectors are also claiming that Syria is where the weapons are, along with Representative Curt Weldon's source in his new book. The Prime Minister of Albania even stated that based on information he has which is not available to the media, he cannot rule out such a transfer.


 


There is also a report that an Iraqi medium-range al-Hussein missile on a truck moved into Syria, and in the early stages of the war, was spotted briefly coming into Iraq, operating its radar overnight, and returning to Syria. Most reports about the transfer indicate missiles were included in the transfers.


 


Glazov: Why do you think Russia was involved?


 


Mauro: In my book, “Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq,” I detail Russian involvement in Iraq’s WMD programs and intelligence services. Inspectors have described the Russians employed on UN inspection teams as being very paranoid, with some even suspecting the Russians helped the Iraqis thwart inspections. I believe that as more documents are translated we will find this to be true.


 


My immediate suspicions that the Russians were involved in cleansing operations began back in early 2003, after I learned about how two Soviet generals had arrived in Iraq and been awarded with medals. Igor Maltsev, known as a leading expert in air-defense, and Vladislav Achalov, an expert in rapid-reaction forces, were accompanied by Yevgeny Primakov, a long-time friend of Saddam Hussein from his days as the head of the Soviet foreign intelligence service and later, prime minister. This occurred as I simultaneously received the first reports of WMD going to Syria, leading me to speculate on such a connection. I became convinced when Ion Mihai Pacepa, the former chief of Communist Romania’s intelligence service, and highest ranking Communist intelligence officer to ever defect, wrote about a plan the Soviet Union had entitled “Sarindar,” or “Operation Emergency Exit.”


 


The plan was drawn up after the Soviet Union decided to use its rogue state allies, specifically Libya and Iraq, to sponsor terrorism. The Soviets would help them make WMD in return, believing that would prevent Western retaliation. The head of the KGB, Yuri Andropov, told Pacepa that Russian advisors ran these countries intelligence services. Primakov was the central figure in dealing with Iraq, Pacepa said, and pointed to his presence in Iraq in the months before the war.


 


“Sarindar” was drawn up first for Libya, and then expanded to include Iraq, with the aim of stripping the rogue state of evidence of WMD activity and especially Russian involvement in illegal programs. The operation also “would frustrate the West by not giving them anything they could make propaganda with,” said Pacepa. The plan went so far as to involve an offensive propaganda campaign aimed at discrediting politicians making the accusations against Russia’s allies.


 


From that, I became convinced. Then later on, John Shaw, the former deputy undersecretary for defense for international technology, reported to the media that Russian Spetsnaz units moved Iraqi WMD into Syria and Lebanon. He said that U.S. intelligence knew the names of the units involved. The Washington Times had other Pentagon officials report that Russian Special Forces helped Iraq perform counter-intelligence operations to thwart the West from knowing what was going on.


 


We must also consider the huge Russian involvement in the Oil-For-Food Scandal. So Russia’s relationship with Iraq was beneficial for them on multiple levels, including financially.


 


Glazov: Do we have the details of the Russian involvement?


 


Mauro: At the Intelligence Summit, Shaw revealed even more detail I was unaware of. Shaw discussed how two Russian ships left the Umm Qasr port in the months before the war and went to the Indian Ocean, carrying materials that he believes included WMD from southern Iraq. He also said his contacts told him of barrels containing hazardous materials being moved to a hospital basement in Beirut, Lebanon.


 


Shaw discussed that Achalov and Maltsev had visited Baghdad at least twenty times in the previous six years. The final planning meeting before their last trip to Baghdad took place in Baku and was chaired by the Russian Minister of Emergency Situations.


 


Shaw said that much of the information came from a source close to the head of Ukraine’s intelligence service, who was thankful to the United States for securing the country’s independence from the Soviet Union.


 


Glazov:  What has been the intelligence community's reaction to the allegation of Russian involvement?


 


Mauro: Shaw said that often this information was dismissed as Israeli disinformation. Although I’m sure it happened to him on a much larger scale, I can confirm this happened. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve brought this up with experts in the field who dismissed it as Israeli garbage, or a fantasy of “Russophobes” and conspiracy theorists. “The Cold War is over” was said to me on several occasions, bringing the debate to a close. I can only hope that deep inside the community they know about all this and are acting upon it in a secretive way.


 


Glazov: So if all this evidence is credible, why wouldn't the Bush Administration take advantage of this information?


 


Mauro: There are multiple ideas out there. I tend to believe that the foreign policy implications of these revelations explain the Administration’s silence. The politicians don’t want to feel obliged to take strong action against Syria, and certainly don’t want to offend Russia. On several issues, Russian cooperation is a great asset if it can be achieved. There’s a debate as to whether Russia ever really helps us. Every country we seem to have problems with has close ties to Russia. It’s likely part of their strategic plan to counter American dominance. Yes, they’re pressuring Iran through negotiations, but Russia is closely tied to the Iranian regime, so one must ask in light of these revelations, is Russia simply “cooperating” as part of a game to buy time for her allies? Or does Russia genuinely want Iran to end its nuclear program?


 


Glazov:  Why do you think Duelfer missed all this?


 


Mauro:  In my speech, I said that Duelfer’s conclusion that Iraq disarmed in 1991 as based on:


 


A) The failure to find WMD stockpiles. This is easily explained by their movement to Syria. I should also mention that there are Pentagon reports and testimony of several people that point to numerous problems in how the ISG operated and was put together, thus hampering the search.


 


B) The lack of documentation on the programs after 1991. Yet, in the same report, Duelfer says that much of the widespread looting was a cover for Iraqi intelligence to destroy documentation and loot weapons sites. Even the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission told the Security Council in the summer of 2004 that satellite imagery showed the Iraqis dismantling suspected weapons sites before, during and after Operation Iraqi Freedom began. Destroyed material and metal was then shipped throughout Europe and the Middle East at a rate of 1,000 tons of metal per month. Dismantled missiles and related components, they said, had already been discovered in several countries—some with UN inspection tags still on them.


 


It is also likely documents were moved outside of Iraq. The Russian ambassador to Baghdad, Vladimir Titorenko, got together a convoy carrying Russian staff from the embassy and headed to Syria, and suddenly got fired upon by American forces. Titorenko and his three closest intelligence officers flew directly to Moscow after escaping, and used the same flight to return immediately to Damascus.  There are widespread reports, even in the Russian press, that sensitive intelligence documents were in the convoy.


 


C) The lack of testimony from detainees. Duelfer relies upon the interviewing process—the same process he harshly criticizes as deeply flawed—to reach his conclusion. The detainees are afraid to talk out of fear for retribution, their testimony being used against them in war crimes trials, and simply because there’s no incentive. I could go into deeper detail as to some of the criticisms of the process. We also know many, many regime figures and scientists are in Syria and to a lesser degree, Iran.


 


It was easy for Iraq to move people around. Most of the regime figures were in Syria, including Saddam’s sons, until American pressure hit a breaking point and they were expelled in the later part of spring 2003. As the war commenced, 23 of Iraq’s 60 diplomatic posts were still operating, including in Amman, Moscow, Damascus, Beirut, Minsk and Tehran. It is possible that personnel are in Belarus as well. Many Iraqi regime figures that were captured [had] Syrian and Belarusian (and often, Libyan) passports. There were reports that people escaped from Syria to Belarus and Libya. Limousines usually used by the Baath Party were seen entering Syria, and then flew aboard a military transport to Libya.


Regarding Belarus, another very close ally of Russia, there was an incident on March 29, 2003. A chartered cargo flight took off from Saddam International Airport when the air space was closed and flew to Minsk. Originally, some suspected it [was] Saddam or his sons were aboard as only the highest officials could get clearance.


Glazov: Mr. Mauro thank you for joining us again.


 


Mauro: Thank you for having me.


 


It wasn't really a war. sm
It was ethnic cleansing.  And it should disturb Clinton.  Despite pleas, he didn't do anything.  Neither did the UN.  100 days is probably not that short a time when you and your family are being hacked to death.  I bet it felt like forever to them.  Hard to imagine that the greater part of the world has forgotten 800,000 people that quickly.  It's amazing the people I have talked to that never heard of what happened there. 
wasn't me
Well, that wasn't me asking you the miscarriage question. I have been out of town for a few days.

But, honestly, I don't know what G-d believes, and I don't think anyone else really knows either. We can guess, imagine, tell ourselves we know, but unless G-d is personally speaking to us, we don't really know what he/she believes.

As for your dramatic description, it is a tad overused and is not very effective (for me anyway). Seems like you must be a fan of horror movies or graphic novels; someone who really enjoys that kind of drama and the attention it can bring you, but it is a little too melodramatic for my taste.

The medical term for miscarriage is abortion. The medical community makes either calls them spontaneous AB or elective AB, but AB all the same.

Again, if you find abortions so distasteful, by all means, please don't have one.
okay I wasn't done yet...
The more I think about it the more it upsets me! He is claiming that it's better for our economy for jobs to be sent overseas, meanwhile we here in the US can go back to school to get better jobs. In this little not-so-great scenario, we will all go to school for great jobs like engineering. Then what will we do with tons of engineers? Or, we all go to school to be doctors and then we'll have all these doctors with no jobs. Seems kinda silly. It would make more sense to be diverse - with some people doing un-skilled jobs (which is a st*pid term because every job requires skill, even cleaning houses) and some going to school to be lawyers, doctors, etc.

Not to mention that not everyone wants to go to school and not everyone does well in school. You would think that keeping some un-skilled jobs in the US would help keep at least some people off of welfare and working. It just doesn't make sense to me.
He wasn't doing this just out of the
goodness of his heart, it was a job, just like MTing.
Wasn't the war about getting...
bin Laden? Ahem. Pubs COMPLETELY failed in that task, didn't they?
That wasn't me. I am the OP
"My post was replying to yours that you said most of the democrats got bored and left" That wasn't me.




Once again....you are the one that saw something that wasn't there.

if it wasn't so sad........
because if you had a 401K a couple of weeks ago, you don't have much of it anymore anyway. I have lost greater than 33% of mine in a matter of months - and I don't see much hope of getting it back, either. And I can't take it out because I would have to quit my job to get it. I will have to work at least 8 additional years to make up for that loss, which essentially means no retirement years for me, and I am betting many, many people will be in that same boat. And that Social Security I have been paying for 40+ years, well, doubt think we are going too far on that - if we see any of it at all. We have worked hard all of our lives, and it has been wiped out. Darn, I should have just spent it on a bigger house, newer car, and world travel. At least I would have memories to show for all those hours!
That wasn't McC with that ad

There are other so-called backers that have started to put ads on TV and radio that McC did not authorize.


There are others that the O did not authorize that are airing too. You have to look at the fine print as to who are putting out these ads. They jump out of the woodwork near the end of elections every 4 years.


but that wasn't me...
like I said, I am sure that I made a mistake, but I just couldn't find that particular one. I did find others, though. LOL. Whatever

there wasn't anything when....(sm)

Clinton was in office.  Even the liberal shows had a field day with him, but no republican response.


Another thing:  O'Reilly from Fox and Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert from Comedy Central all show up on each other's shows, which is usually hilarious.  I really don't like O'Reilly, but at least he has the ding-dings to go on there.  However, when the comedians go on news shows like Bill O'Reilly, they get grilled like they are actually a news station, and they are comedians.  ROFL...


Of course I wasn't
However, his grandmother, step-sister and step-brother were. His mom could not fly back to US due to her late stage of pregnancy, hence had him in Kenya and later registered the birth in Hawaii. I could care less about her age too, but the laws are the laws.

You really do not want to get into the issue with McCain. McCain was born in Panama on American soil AND both parents were American. BIG difference.
Maybe because it wasn't?
x
LOL! Yes, it was, wasn't it?? (nm)

I wasn't saying it was okay. What I was saying

was that everyone is in an uproar over what we did to the prisoners but it's okay for the rest of the world to do it to our soldiers and citizens, with not a single word said against it.


 As for this comment you made:"Communist, socialist, fascist?  No.....more like honest and a realist.  I love my country, but I am not so blinded by patriotism that I can't see our faults." I disagree. You are not blinded by patriotism. You are blinded by the wool being pulled over your eyes.


I love my country, too, but I don't take the 'spoken word' of any politician as truth. I absolutely don't trust a single one of them anymore and that's a shame.


How do you know? If it wasn't for MDs like this, I would not have sm
had a choice on whether or not I'd be forced to carry full-term.

MYOB until you are in the same situation. This subject burns me up. And I think rightly so - until you walk a mile in my shoes, butt out folks.
There wasn't only **one**. There is
That's the racist profile the republican party seems to want to embrace and the one being defended by many people on this board.
Would be funny if it wasn't..

Now that wasn't nice. SM
What am I SAYING! I am on the liberal board!!! I'll leave you along. After all, this board is just hopping with interesting things to talk about.